Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 12:01:04 +1030 From: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com> To: Alfred Perlstein <bright@hotjobs.com> Cc: John Birrell <jb@cimlogic.com.au>, freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Read this... Message-ID: <19981210120104.G12688@freebie.lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9812092011390.27793-100000@bright.fx.genx.net>; from Alfred Perlstein on Wed, Dec 09, 1998 at 08:31:10PM -0500 References: <19981210110516.V12688@freebie.lemis.com> <Pine.BSF.4.05.9812092011390.27793-100000@bright.fx.genx.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wednesday, 9 December 1998 at 20:31:10 -0500, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > On Thu, 10 Dec 1998, Greg Lehey wrote: > >> On Thursday, 10 December 1998 at 7:47:48 +1100, John Birrell wrote: >>> Alfred Perlstein wrote: >>>> Will someone with more courage and experiance than I please speak up about >>>> this, perhaps contact sun? >>> >>> Please _don't_ ask Sun for anything until you have a working port on >>> limited hardware. I doubt that anyone following this list would be >>> prepared to spend $$$ based on what has been said so far. Those people >>> who have access to Sun machines should be able to do a port with neither >>> financial nor moral support from Sun. If you want this sort of support, >>> you have to earn it. >> >> I suppose I should point you people to >> http://www.lemis.com/x/sunworld-bsd.html, which is a draft of an >> article I've submitted to SunWorld. This is for review only in the >> present form; please don't distribute it, but I'd be interested in >> comments. >> >> One thing in particular occurred to me in this context: why does Sun >> want Linux or *BSD? On the whole, Solaris <whatever number it is >> this week> is a pretty good operating system, and neither Linux nor >> *BSD can equal it. What advantage would I have running FreeBSD on my >> UltraSparc? Or should we be doing what NetBSD and OpenBSD are already >> doing and running it on older (32 bit) Sparc hardware? > > This is my reasoning why I want a sparc port: > > Solaris (even with source license) is basically closed source. It's being > piecemealed down into as small pieces as possible in order to charge for > each individual component. > > FreeBSD has very neat features NQNFS with leases is great, softupdates > _DESTROYS_ solaris UFS without a question. I thought that Solaris no longer used ufs. Don't they have something more advanced? > Is it just me, or do most of the people on this list dislike SYSV-like > setups? I do, anyway, but before we try to replace them, we should at least stand a chance. > please excuse the mini sarcasm, but we could ditch FreeBSD all > together and run SCO or SolX86 no? :) Sure :-) Don't get me wrong, I can see advantages. But at the moment, I'm more concerned with FreeBSD keeping up with the market place, and despite all the open source hype, we're having trouble. There are some basic architectural problems that need attention, and I'm not sure that the FreeBSD way of doing things is adequate. This is one of the reasons, BTW, that John Dyson stated for leaving the FreeBSD project. Greg -- See complete headers for address, home page and phone numbers finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-sparc" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19981210120104.G12688>